2015 SJDM Conference Master Schedule Hilton Chicago Hotel November 20-23, 2015

Transcription

1 Draft Schedule - Subject to Change: Last Updated on August 13, SJDM Conference Master Schedule Hilton Chicago Hotel November 20-23, 2015 FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 20 5:00-7:00 pm Welcome Reception / Registration Hilton Salon A Pre-function Space 5:30-7:30 pm Tribute to Paul Slovic Hilton Williford 7:00-9:00 pm Executive Board Dinner Hilton Location TBD Offsite SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 21 7:30-8:30 am Registration and Continental Breakfast Hilton Salon A Pre-function Space 8:30-10:00 am Paper Session #1 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3, Salon A-4 10:00-10:30 am Morning Coffee Break Hilton Salon A Pre-function Space 10:30-12:00 pm Paper Session #2 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3, Salon A-4 12:00-1:30 pm Lunch Break (on your own) 1:30-2:30 pm Interview with Danny Kahneman by Leif Nelson Hilton International South 2:30-4:00 pm Paper Session #3 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3, Salon A-4 4:00-4:30 pm Afternoon Coffee Break Hilton Salon A Pre-function Space 4:30-6:00 pm Paper Session #4 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3, Salon A-4 6:00-6:30 pm Einhorn Award Hilton Salon A-1 6:30-8:30 pm Graduate Student Social Event Hilton Boulevard SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 22 8:30-10:30 am Poster Session #1 - w/ Continental Breakfast Hilton Salon D 10:30-12:00 pm Paper Session #5 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3, Salon A-4 12:00-1:30 pm Women in SJDM Networking Event Hilton Continental A 12:00-1:30 pm Lunch Break (on your own) 1:30-2:30 pm Keynote Address by Max Bazerman Hilton Williford for 250 2:45-4:15 pm Paper Session #6 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3, Salon A-4 4:15-4:45 pm Afternoon Coffee Hilton Salon A Pre-function Space 4:45-5:30 pm Presidential Address by Ellen Peters Hilton Williford for 250 5:30-7:30 pm Poster Session #2 w/ Cash Bar Hilton Salon D 9:00 pm-2:00 am SJDM Evening Social Event at Jazz Showcase MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23 8:25-9:15 am Business Meeting w/ Continental Breakfast and Student Poster Award Hilton Williford ABC 9:15-10:45 am Paper Session #7 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2 10:45-11:15 am Morning Coffee Break Hilton Salon A Pre-function Space 11:15-12:45 pm Paper Session #8 Hilton Salon A-1, Salon A-2

2 Session #1 8:30 AM SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2015 Rooms - Hilton - Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3 Salon A-4 Track I Track II Track III Track IV Salon A-1 Salon A-2 Salon A-3 Salon A-4 Biases Consumer Preferences and Satisfaction Self-Control Uncertainty Wei - Sampling Traps: How the Schilbach - Alcohol and Self-Control: Opportunity to Sample Experiential A Field Experiment in India Products Reduces Hedonic Value Diversification Green - The Foreclosed Option Fallacy 8:50 AM Liu - Breaking Bad (News) 9:10 AM 9:30 AM Logg - Is Overconfidence a Motivated Bias? De Wilde - The Anchoring Bias in Group Judgment Etkin - The Cost of Personal Quantification Klesse - The Impact of Oral Versus Manual Expression Modalities on Choice Satisfaction Tsai - The Intensification Effect of Quantity Specificity on Consumption Experience over Time Schwartz - Bringing Ulysses to Scale: A Tale of Persistence, Spillovers and Customer Loyalty Urminsky - Impatient to Achieve or Impatient to Receive: How the Goal Gradient Effect Underlies Time Discounting Tian - Rituals Promote Self-Control Reinholtz - Almost Everyone Misunderstands the Benefit of Barasz - Hoping for the Worst: The Perverse Incentives of Certainty- Seeking Moon - Paying for What You'll Like? The Uncertain Value of Uncertainty Fox - Self-serving Attributions of Epistemic Versus Aleatory Uncertainty Session #2 Biases and Heuristics I Consumer Decision Making I Nudges Emotion Evangelidis - Context Polarity: The 10:30 AM Krijnen - People Use Decision Asymmetric Impact of Context Bereby-Meyer - Honesty Speaks a Importance as a Cue for Deferral Effects on Advantaged versus Second Language Weingarten - Duration Consideration Disadvantaged Options 10:50 AM 11:10 AM 11:30 AM Van de Calseyde - Decision Time as Information in Judgment and Choice Greenberg - Opportunity Cost Neglect Eliminates the Effect of Choices on Preferences Paolacci - Less Likely Outcomes are Valued Less Sussman - Valence in Context: Asymmetric Responses to Positive and Negative Attribute Weights Neuwirth - When are Consumption Experiences Spontaneously Compared to Memories of More Pleasurable Alternatives? Rosenzweig - Same Wrong, Different Restitution? Heightened Sensitivity to Inequity in the Context of Apology Rogers - The Threat of Excellence: Exposure to Peers Exemplary Work Undermines Performance and Success Hardisty - Encouraging Energy Efficiency: Product Labels Facilitate Temporal Tradeoffs House - Implementation Intentions: How to Nudge Organizations to Pay their Overdue Taxes DeCelles - Flying Into a Rage: Inequality between First Class and Economy Predicts Air Rage Incidents Buechel - Mistaking the Journey for the Destination: Overestimating the Fruits of (More) Labor Vohs - The Illusion of Learning Session #3 Biases and Heuristics II Consumer Decision Making II Nudges and Choice Architecture Honesty and Dishonesty Pogacar - Ethically Deployed Urminsky - Outcome Neglect: How Klein - Lie Detection is Improved Bhattacharjee - Judging Good Taste: Defaults: Transparency and Consumer 2:30 PM Insight Failure Undermines Simple Through Group Discussion, Not True Preference or Pretense? Protection Via Disclosure and Utility Maximization Aggregation of Independent Judgments Preference Articulation 2:50 PM 3:10 PM Dannals - Perceptions of the Average Are Not Averaged Perceptions: Biased Estimates of the Social Norm Zhang - An Urgency Effect in Response to Future Rate Increases Howard - Understanding the Expense Prediction Bias Chin - Consumer Evaluations of Credit Card Offers Castelo - Informed Nudges: Preference-consistent Choice Architecture and Disclosure Evers - When Do People Prefer Carrots to Sticks? A Robust 'Matching Effect' in Policy Evaluation Bhattacharjee - Motivated Moral Decoupling Among Liberals and Conservatives Roux - When Choosing the Best Brings out the Worst: Maximizing Increases Cheating Due to Greater Perceptions of Scarcity Ayal - When Robin Hood Takes a O'Donnell - Sets and Statistics: Olson - The Interpersonal Dynamics Daniels - Interpersonal Choice 3:30 PM Polygraph: Detecting Egocentric and Explaining the Offer Framing Effect of Shared Financial Decisions Architecture Altruistic Cheating Session #4 Taxes, Fees and Payment Structures Giving Politics and Government Numeracy and Decision Quality 4:30 PM 4:50 PM 5:10 PM 5:30 PM Srna - A Prediction Gap in the Effect of Income Tax on Effort Shaddy - Beware the Bundle: When Consumers Pay Less, Yet Demand More Rick - Income Tax and the Motivation to Work Lieberman - Norm Inferences: The Hidden Influence of Pricing Structure Givi - When Gift Giving is Selfish: A Motivation to be Unique Shah - Paper Or Plastic : How We Pay Influences Post-Transaction Connection Meindl - Harnessing Hypocrisy: Comparing the Effects of Different Moral Proclamations on Behavior Williams - Sometimes It s Okay to Give a Blender: Giver and Recipient Preferences for Hedonic and Utilitarian Gifts Slovic - Confronting the Collapse of Humanitarian Values in Foreign Policy Decisions Merkle - Model-based Scoring Rules for Evaluating Probability Judgments: Application to a Geopolitical Forecasting Tournament Buell - Surfacing the Submerged State: Operational Transparency in Government Baker - The Value of Precision in Geopolitical Forecasting: Empirical Foundations for Intelligence Analysis and Foreign Policy Decision Making Olsson - A New Small Crowd Selection Method McKenzie - Decision Making, Rationality, and Creativity Goldstein - Improving the Comprehension of Numbers in the News Dickert - Valuations and Scope Sensitivity: The Quest for Linearity

3 SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2015 Rooms - Hilton - Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3 Salon A-4 Track I Track II Track III Track IV Salon A-1 Salon A-2 Salon A-3 Salon A-4 Session #5 Altruism Collaboration and Cooperation Medicine and Decision Making Prediction 10:30 AM Vastfjall - Pseudoinefficacy: When Feelings for Those Not Helped Demotivate Helping the Ones That Could Be Helped Barneron - Conflict of Interest in Social Decision-Making: Scope- Insensitivity and the Neglect of Losses Borne by Many 10:50 AM Berman - Limits of Effective Altruism Weisel - Corrupt Collaboration 11:10 AM 11:30 AM Harel - Donating Life or Mourning Death: The Effects of Case Framing on the Willingness to Commit to Organ Donation Kessler - Getting the One Percent to Give Levine - Signaling Emotion and Reason in Human Cooperation Müller-Trede - Skeptical Reciprocity and Principled Defection: Attribution in the Prisoners Dilemma Gaissmaier - Diagnostic Performance by Medical Students Working Individually or in Teams Robitaille - Nudging to Increase Organ and Tissue Donor Registrations Clement - Strategies to Reduce the Negative Consequences of Deferrals on Subsequent Blood Donation VanEpps - The Price (and Calorie Label) is Wrong: Error Detection as Measure of Calorie Label Processing Pavel Atanasov - Accountability, Prediction Accuracy and Information Exchange Kelly - People Can Take the Outside View, but They Don t Want To Use It Kane - Predicting Clinical Forecasting Errors with Local Estimators Yeomans - The Case Against Recommendations Session #6 Charitable Giving Poverty Goals and Ideals Advice Zaval - Focusing on Future Wallace - Goal Specificity, Subjective Dillon - Don't Ask, Don't Tell: The 2:45 PM Consequences: Leveraging Legacy to Shah - Slowing Down Youth Violence Impact, and Motivation: A Reference- Problems with Solicited Advice Promote Sustainable Decisions Points Approach 3:05 PM Cryder - The Charity Beauty Premium 3:25 PM 3:45 PM Zhang - Recognition for Loyalty in Charitable Giving Chao - Motivation Crowding Out in Fundraising: Evidence from a Field Experiment Schofield - The Economic Costs of Low Caloric Intake: Evidence from India Meng - Thinking about Financial Deprivation: Rumination and Decision Making Among the Poor Jachimowicz - Trust Your Neighborhood: Neighborhood Trust Can Protect Low-Income Groups From Myopic Decisions Urminsky - The Extent of Post- Reward Crowding-Out: A Rewarding Opportunity Account Davidai - The Ideal Road Not Taken: Regrets of Action and Inaction and Self-Discrepancy Theory Sezer - To Be or Not to Be Your Authentic Self? Catering to Others Preferences Hinders Performance Soll - Measuring the Influence of Advice Dietvorst - Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them Minson - The Advocacy Mindset: Arguing Boosts Confidence in Everything MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2015 Rooms - Hilton - Salon A-1, Salon A-2 Track I Track II Salon A-1 Salon A-2 Session #7 Evaluations of Experiences Choices and Beliefs 9:15 AM Tully - Questioning the End Effect: Endings Do Not Inherently Have a Koehler - Can Journalistic 'False Balance' Distort Public Perception of Disproportionate Impact on Evaluations of Experiences Consensus in Expert Opinion? 9:35 AM O'Brien - Tracking Hedonic Change: Asymmetric Judgments of Improvement Hauser - IT S A TRAP! Instructional Manipulation Checks Prompt Systematic versus Decline Thinking on 'Tricky' Tasks 9:55 AM Robinson - Description-Experience Gap or Construct-Data Gap? Garcia - N-Equality: More People, Less Concern for Equality? 10:15 AM Hagmann - Wait, Wait Don t Tell Me: Repeated Choices With Clustered Feedback Molouki - Personal Change and the Continuity of Identity Session #8 Hormones, Eye-Tracking and Computational Modeling Understanding Preferences 11:15 AM Plassmann - Peacocks, Testosterone and Luxury Goods: Single-dose Gordon-Hecker - When Less is Better than More: Preferring Equity over Testosterone Administration Increases Preference for Status Goods Efficiency in Allocation Decisions 11:35 AM Tomm - Scarcity Captures Attention and Induces Neglect: Eyetracking and Behavioral Evidence Dellaert - Preference Dynamics in Sequential Choice with Defaults 11:55 AM Nave - Testosterone Impairs Rational Thinking in Men Risen - Avoiding Information to Protect a Strong Intuitive Preference 12:15 PM Bhatia - A Model of Associative Judgment Spiller - Making Decisions Disrupts Relatively Stable Preferences

4 SATURDAY NOVEMBER 21, 2015 Rooms - Hilton - Salon A-1, Salon A-2, Salon A-3 Salon A-4 Session #1 Track I: Biases - Hilton - Salon A-1 - Saturday 8:30 am - 10:30 am The Foreclosed Option Fallacy Green, Etan (Microsoft Research) Many economic models assume that individuals are forward-looking---conditional on the present, future behavior is independent of past choices. This paper documents a dependence on past choices in NFL kickoff returns. I compare returns from just behind the goal line, for which the returner declined an option to achieve the 20-yard line with certainty, to returns from just in front of the goal line, for which no such option was available. Behavior is pathdependent: returners are 56% more likely to achieve the 20-yard line exactly after the option is foreclosed than when it was never available. Contact: etangreen@gmail.com Breaking Bad (News) Liu, Heidi (Harvard University); John, Leslie (Harvard Business School) "Don't shoot the messenger" is a phrase commonly uttered by individuals forced to deliver harsh truths. Beyond the interpersonal discomfort of breaking bad news, do such messengers incur penalties? Are messengers the targets of (unwarranted) criticism? Three experiments suggest the answer is YES: recipients erroneously conclude that their messengers are responsible for the event's occurrence, in turn causing them to deem their messengers incompetent. Ironically, in the many situations in which messengers can be part of the solution - the physician conveying a cancer diagnosis, for example - recipients are prone to turning away from the messenger, which potentially exacerbates their problems. Contact: hliu@fas.harvard.edu Is Overconfidence a Motivated Bias? Logg, Jennifer M. (University of California, Berkeley); Haran, Uriel (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev); Moore, Don A. (University of California, Berkeley) Is overconfidence a motivated bias? We tested the relationship between motivation and overconfidence by experimentally manipulating participants' motivation to view themselves positively. We only found an effect of motivation on assessments made about vague personality traits, using vague measures. The effect of motivation disappeared when we introduced specific trait measures or an objective standard of performance. We found that the vague measures did not simply allow individuals to inflate self-ratings. Rather, the lack of an objective standard for vague traits allowed people to create idiosyncratic definitions and view themselves as better than others in their own unique way. Contact: jenn_logg@haas.berkeley.edu

5 The Anchoring Bias in Group Judgment De Wilde, Tim R. W. (University of Amsterdam); Ten Velden, Femke S. (University of Amsterdam); De Dreu, Carsten K. W. (University of Amsterdam) We present results of three studies showing when and how anchors affect group judgment. Our results show that groups, like individuals, fall victim to the anchoring bias. However, we also show that this only applies to cooperative groups who strive for consensus. When groups are individualistically motivated they were not vulnerable to anchors. Moreover, when cooperative groups experience process-accountability the anchoring bias also disappears. Finally, we show that this group level anchoring bias is not driven by information exchange but simply by preference exchange. We discuss implications for real life groups and the anchoring and group judgment literature. Contact: Session #1 Track II: Consumer Preferences and Satisfaction - Hilton - Salon A-2 - Saturday 8:30 am - 10:30 am Sampling Traps: How the Opportunity to Sample Experiential Products Reduces Hedonic Value Wei, Sarah (University of Alberta); Häubl, Gerald (University of Alberta) Intuitively, sampling multiple experiential products before selecting one of them should be beneficial to consumers. By contrast, we show that the opportunity to sample tends to trap consumers in a mental state characterized by an exploration mindset, which undermines their motivation to consume any of the products in its entirety, ultimately resulting in a less enjoyable consumption experience. Evidence from four experiments demonstrates this paradoxical effect and sheds light on the underlying psychological mechanism. The findings identify the divisibility of experiential products and the partitioning of consumption experiences (into a pre- and post-commitment phase) as key moderators of the effect. Contact: mwei1@ualberta.ca The Cost of Personal Quantification Etkin, Jordan (Duke University) From sleep and energy use to exercise and health, people have access to more information about their behavior than ever before. The appeal of personal quantification seems clear. But might the new tools people are using--quantifying life-- rob them of some of the benefits of engaging in those activities? Four experiments demonstrate that while measurement increases how much of an activity people do (e.g., walk or read more), it can simultaneously decrease how much people enjoy those activities. This can reduce continued engagement and decrease subjective wellbeing. Even in the absence of external rewards, measurement can have similar effects. Contact: jordan.etkin@duke.edu The Impact of Oral Versus Manual Expression Modalities on Choice Satisfaction

6 Voss, Thorsten (Mannheim University); Klesse, Anne-Kathrin (Tilburg University); Goukens, Caroline (Maastricht University); Levav, Jonathan (Stanford Graduate School of Business ) People express their preferences using various modalities. In a grocery store, shoppers grab their preferred items from the shelf and in a restaurant diners express their preference by speaking to the waiter. We demonstrate that changes in the modality utilized to express one's choice cause different levels of choice satisfaction. Five studies show that expressing one's choice orally (speaking) results in greater satisfaction than expressing it manually (e.g., by grabbing one option), even for identical choice outcomes. In addition, we provide evidence that speaking prompts greater choice satisfaction because it triggers intuitive rather than cognitive processes in decision making. Contact: a.k.klesse@uvt.nl The Intensification Effect of Quantity Specificity on Consumption Experience over Time Tsai, Claire (University of Toronto); Zhao, Min (University of Toronto) We propose and demonstrate that specifying consumption quantity interferes with the process of hedonic adaptation by increasing attention to the consumption event as the event comes to an end. The heightened attention in turn intensifies the experience toward the end. Consequently, quantity specificity enhances positive experiences and worsens negative ones. Contact: claire.tsai@rotman.utoronto.ca Session #1 Track III: Self-Control - Hilton - Salon A-3 - Saturday 8:30 am - 10:30 am Alcohol and Self-Control: A Field Experiment in India Schilbach, Frank (MIT) High levels of alcohol consumption are more common among the poor. Since alcohol is thought to induce myopia, this paper tests for impacts on self-control and on savings behavior. In a three-week field experiment with low-income workers in India, I provided 229 individuals with a high-return savings opportunity and randomized incentives for sobriety. The incentives significantly reduced daytime drinking as measured by decreased breathalyzer scores. This in turn increased savings by 60 percent. Moreover, over half of the study participants were willing to sacrifice money to receive incentives to be sober, exhibiting demand for commitment to increase their sobriety. Contact: frankschilbach@gmail.com Bringing Ulysses to Scale: A Tale of Persistence, Spillovers and Customer Loyalty Mochon, Daniel (Tulane University); Schwartz, Janet (Tulane University); Ariely, Dan (Duke University)

7 Incorporating behavioral science into actionable policy can be challenging. Economies of scale, the persistence of effects once incentives are removed and unintended consequences, are all factors that can limit the net impact of an intervention. We address these important issues by examining the extended effects of a penalty-based behavioral intervention, and offer some reassurance that such interventions can cost-effectively be brought to scale, without fear of negative spillovers and consumer backlash. Contact: janet.schwartz@tulane.edu Impatient to Achieve or Impatient to Receive: How the Goal Gradient Effect Underlies Time Discounting Urminsky, Oleg (University of Chicago Booth School); Goswami, Indranil (University of Chicago Booth School of Business) Prior research has often confounded goal gradient effects and time discounting. We separate the timing of goal completion and reward receipt in order to separately measure goal gradient and time discounting effects. We observe separate and disassociated large goal gradient and small time discounting effects. Goal gradient effects (impatience to achieve, rather than receive an outcome) provide a partial, but substantial, explanation of time discounting and, consequently, can inflate estimated discount rates. Contact: oleg.urminsky@chicagobooth.edu Rituals Promote Self-Control Tian, Ding (Allen) (University of Alberta); Schroeder, Juliana (University of Chicago); Häubl, Gerald (University of Alberta); Risen, Jane L. (University of Chicago); Norton, Michael I. (Harvard University ); Gino, Francesca (Harvard University) We propose a novel strategy to promote individual self-control: engaging in ritualized behavior. Rituals are symbolic behaviors occurring in fixed episodic sequences. As such, they tend to be both structured and goal-directed. We therefore predicted that we could harness rituals to improve self-control. Across six experiments in the field, laboratory, and online, we demonstrate that, relative to doing nothing and to performing non-ritualized behaviors, performing ritualized behaviors enhanced self-control in domains ranging from healthy eating to prosocial behavior. We explore the psychological mechanisms and moderators for these effects, and discuss the implications for using rituals to promote self-control. Contact: dtian2@ualberta.ca Session #1 Track IV: Uncertainty - Hilton - Salon A-4 - Saturday 8:30 am - 10:30 am Almost Everyone Misunderstands the Benefit of Diversification Reinholtz, Nicholas (University of Colorado Boulder); Fernbach, Philip M. (University of Colorado Boulder); de Langhe, Bart (University of Colorado Boulder)

8 Diversification allows investors to reduce volatility without sacrificing expected returns, yet many people are underdiversified. We examine people's beliefs about the consequences of diversification and find two biases: (1) Many people, especially those low in financial literacy, expect diversification to increase volatility. This seems to occur because people conflate the unpredictability of the many stocks within a portfolio with the unpredictability of the whole portfolio. (2) Most people, especially those high in financial literacy, expect diversification to increase returns. This seems to occur because people know diversification is "good," but associate this with the central tendency of the outcome distribution. Contact: nreinholtz@gmail.com Hoping for the Worst: The Perverse Incentives of Certainty-Seeking Barasz, Kate (Harvard University); Hagerty, Serena (Harvard University) Extensive research documents people's aversion to uncertainty. Building on this, we show that individuals may actually prefer worse-but-more-certain outcomes (e.g., 95% chance of a disease) to better-but-more-uncertain outcomes (e.g., 50% chance of a disease), particularly when faced with a difficult decision (e.g., whether to have surgery). In three studies, we show that people are paradoxically happier and more relieved with worse-but-more-certain news. Further, when asked which news they'd prefer, people overwhelmingly choose worse-butmore-certain outcomes. Finally, the effect is mitigated when the decision is delegated; if a doctor--not a patient--is making the difficult choice, people prefer less serious outcomes. Contact: kbarasz@hbs.edu Paying for What You'll Like? The Uncertain Value of Uncertainty Moon, Alice (Disney Research); Nelson, Leif D. (Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley) Uncertainty is normally perceived as fear- and anxiety-provoking, and uncertainty reduction is thought to be a fundamental human motivation in various domains. However, a small literature suggests that risky prospects can sometimes be positive, encouraging hope and excitement instead of fear and anxiety. Do people ever value uncertainty, and if so, when? Across several experiments, we find that people's responses to uncertainty depend on how "value" is measured. Specifically, uncertainty is positive using rating measures (i.e., expected enjoyment) but is negative using pricing measures (i.e., willingness-to-pay). Contact: alicemoon@gmail.com Self-serving Attributions of Epistemic Versus Aleatory Uncertainty Fox, Craig (UCLA); Tannenbaum, David (University of Chicago); Ülkümen, Gülden (USC); Walters, Dan (UCLA); Erner, Carsten (UCLA)

9 People attribute uncertainty to ignorance ("epistemic" uncertainty) and/or random processes ("aleatory" uncertainty). In four studies we show that: (1) forecasters are assigned more credit/blame for correct/incorrect predictions when events are seen as more epistemic; they are viewed as more lucky/unlucky when events are seen as more aleatory; (2) people with low self-esteem see their own successful predictions as involving more epistemic and less aleatory uncertainty but their unsuccessful predictions as involving more aleatory and less epistemic uncertainty; (3) real companies that miss their earnings forecasts use more aleatory language in their earnings announcements than companies that exceed their earnings forecasts. Contact: Session #2 Track I: Biases and Heuristics I - Hilton - Salon A-1 - Saturday 10:30 am - 12:00 pm People Use Decision Importance as a Cue for Deferral Krijnen, Job M. T. (Tilburg University); Zeelenberg, Marcel (Tilburg University); Breugelmans, Seger M. (Tilburg University) In a series of experiments we found that people use decision importance as a cue for deferral. People deferred important decisions more than unimportant ones, independent of the choice set composition. Importance caused deferral when deferral was non-instrumental, risky, and even when deferral had no material benefits and was financially costly. We discuss the relevance of these findings in the context of retirement saving, where governments, retirement funds, and employers often try to motivate people by emphasizing or increasing the importance of retirement saving. This strategy may backfire by causing people to defer saving decisions. Contact: j.m.t.krijnen@tilburguniversity.edu Decision Time as Information in Judgment and Choice Van de Calseyde, Philippe (Eindhoven University of Technology); Keren, Gideon (Tilburg University); Zeelenberg, Marcel (Tilburg University) People often observe others' decisions and the time it took them to reach the decision. Following a signaling perspective, we demonstrate that people derive information from the time that others needed in reaching a decision. Specifically, the findings of multiple experiments and a field study reveal that decision times are perceived as indicative of the degree of doubt that the decision maker experienced. In turn, these inferences of doubt reliably affected people's decisions such as with whom to collaborate, even when the collaboration would yield an inferior outcome. Implications for how choices are affected by outcomes and signals are discussed. Contact: pvdcalseyde@gmail.com Opportunity Cost Neglect Eliminates the Effect of Choices on Preferences Greenberg, Adam E. (University of California, San Diego); Spiller, Stephen (University of California, Los Angeles)

10 The idea that choices alter preferences has been widely studied, yet in prior research, all alternatives were salient at the time of choice. Opportunity costs capture the value of the best forgone alternative and should be considered as part of any decision, yet people often neglect them. How does the salience of opportunity costs at the time of choice influence subsequent evaluations of chosen and foregone options? Two experiments show that when opportunity costs are explicit at the time of choice, the post-choice spread between evaluations of focal options and opportunity costs is larger than when opportunity costs remain implicit. Contact: Less Likely Outcomes are Valued Less Paolacci, Gabriele (Erasmus University); Vosgerau, Joachim (Bocconi University) Most models of decision making under risk assume that a prospect's outcome is valued independent of the outcome's likelihood to occur. In violation of this assumption, we show that people value outcomes (gains and losses) less the less likely they are to occur. We demonstrate that such probability-dependent valuations of outcomes can lead to preference reversals. They may also be a contributing factor for why people are often reluctant to take preventive actions for negative future events (e.g., taking the threats of climate change seriously). Contact: gpaolacci@rsm.nl Session #2 Track II: Consumer Decision Making I - Hilton - Salon A-2 - Saturday 10:30 am - 12:00 pm Context Polarity: The Asymmetric Impact of Context Effects on Advantaged versus Disadvantaged Options Evangelidis, Ioannis (Bocconi University); Levav, Jonathan (Stanford Graduate School of Business); Simonson, Itamar (Stanford Graduate School of Business) Decision-making research has advanced a series of hypotheses and empirical findings that make competing predictions about how the addition of a new option should affect the choice share of the original options in the set. We advance a new hypothesis, context polarity, that invokes baseline preference to predict how changes in choice set configuration influence choice. While testing for context polarity, we observe replications, but also reversals, of established context effects such as attraction, compromise, and single-option aversion. Contact: ievangelidis@yahoo.com Valence in Context: Asymmetric Responses to Positive and Negative Attribute Weights Sussman, Abigail (University of Chicago)

11 We examine how preferences vary as a function of relative levels of positive and negative attributes and also the valence of the overall context. Holding net value (positive minus negative attributes) constant, will find that people prefer options with more positive attributes when the overall value is negative, even though this option also has more negative attributes. However, preferences shift towards the option with fewer negative attributes when the overall value is positive, even though this option also has fewer positive attributes. Across a range of domains, we find evidence that a shift in attribute salience contributes to this pattern. Contact: asussman@chicagobooth.edu When are Consumption Experiences Spontaneously Compared to Memories of More Pleasurable Alternatives? Neuwirth, Benjamin (Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University); Brendl, Miguel (Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University) In this paper we ask whether experiencing a great event will diminish the pleasure derived from a related, more ordinary event due to hedonic contrast? Although previous authors have argued that this will be the case, we draw on exemplar theories of stimulus classification to argue that ordinary events are relatively unlikely to be compared to memories of great events, even if those great events are highly accessible in memory. We test our predictions in a series of four experiments. Contact: b-neuwirth@kellogg.northwestern.edu Same Wrong, Different Restitution? Heightened Sensitivity to Inequity in the Context of Apology Rosenzweig, Emily (Tulane University); Critcher, Clayton (University of California, Berkeley) The rise of customer loyalty programs means people have become accustomed to inequitable treatment, seeing 'more valuable' customers receive privileges that they do not. However businesses use loyalty status to allocate more than just perks--companies also differentially compensate customers who they have inconvenienced or mistreated. In five studies we demonstrate that the generally negative evaluations that attach to being treated inequitably by a company are significantly exacerbated when that inequity is part of an apology for its wrongdoing. This stems from the fact that inequitable compensation violates an unspoken norm of equity embedded in our expectations of apologies Contact: erosenzw@tulane.edu Session #2 Track III: Nudges - Hilton - Salon A-3 - Saturday 10:30 am - 12:00 pm Honesty Speaks a Second Language Bereby-Meyer, Yoella (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel); Hayakawa, Sayuri (University of Chicago, USA); Shalvi, Shaul (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel); Corey, Joanna D. (Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain); Costa, Albert (Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain); Keysar, Boaz University of Chicago, USA

12 We investigate how using a native vs. foreign language affects people's ethical behavior. Participants privately rolled a die and were paid according to the outcome they reported. Therefore, they could cheat to inflate their profit. An identity-based account predicts that a foreign language would increase cheating, while a dual system account predicts decreased cheating. With native speakers of Hebrew, Korean, Spanish and English we discovered that, on average, people inflate their earnings less when they use a foreign language, supporting a dual system approach. Our discovery challenges theories of ethics to account for the role of language in ethical behavior. Contact: yoella@bgu.ac.il The Threat of Excellence: Exposure to Peers Exemplary Work Undermines Performance and Success Rogers, Todd (Harvard Kennedy School); Feller, Avi (UC Berkeley) People are often exposed to peers' exemplary work in everyday life, and sometimes by design in interventions (employee-of-the-month, social comparison interventions). We show that exposure to exemplars can undermine motivation and success by leading people to perceive that the level of performance of their peers is unattainable. It also causes de-identification with the relevant domain. We examine "exemplar discouragement" by exploiting the incidental exposure to information about peers' abilities that occurs when students assess each other's work in a MOOC (N=5,740), and replicate and extend it online (N=361). Exemplar discouragement extends reference bias and social comparison research, with intervention implications. Contact: todd_rogers@hks.harvard.edu Encouraging Energy Efficiency: Product Labels Facilitate Temporal Tradeoffs Hardisty, David J. (University of British Columbia); Shim, Yoonji (University of British Columbia); Sun, Daniel (University of Alberta); Griffin, Dale (University of British Columbia) Why has the uptake of energy efficient products been so slow? We propose that many consumers have a latent "long-term cost minimization" goal. Normally, when consumers are making purchases, they do not think about long-term costs. However, through a "10-year energy cost" label, we activate this latent goal, thus increasing the proportion of energy efficient choices from 12% to 48% in a field study in five drug stores over a period of six weeks. Furthermore, in a series of four lab studies, we establish the mechanism and demonstrate the efficacy of this technique relative to existing alternatives. Contact: david.hardisty@sauder.ubc.ca Implementation Intentions: How to Nudge Organizations to Pay their Overdue Taxes House, Julian (University of Toronto); Mazar, Nina (University of Toronto); Robitaille, Nicole (Queen's University)

13 Little is known about the effectiveness of choice architecture when it comes to organizational actors, and indeed there are theoretical reasons to suspect that "nudging" organizations might be unproductive. In a large-scale field experiment involving collection of overdue taxes from organizations, however, we find that cost-free changes to collections letters significantly increased the speed and number of tax filings. Compared to a standard letter, our treatment letter, which we designed to instill implementation intentions, produced nine and 12 percent relative increases in the number of organization filling returns during our field experiment and its exact replication a year later. Contact: julian.house11@rotman.utoronto.ca Session #2 Track IV: Emotion - Hilton - Salon A-4 - Saturday 10:30 am - 12:00 pm Duration Consideration Diehl, Kristin (University of Southern California); Weingarten, Evan (University of Pennsylvania); Zauberman, Gal (Yale University) Duration neglect is a classic finding: after controlling for peak and end affect, duration plays only a small, if any, additive role in retrospective evaluations of experiences. However, people may consider duration indirectly, such that duration affects the actual perceptions of peak/end intensity, which subsequently alter experiential evaluations. We present studies in which participants listen to longer and shorter aversive sounds and provide moment-to-moment and global evaluations. In addition to consistently replicating the original results, we also show that duration has an indirect effect on evaluations by intensifying how people experience peak and end, both of which then affect evaluation. Contact: ewein@wharton.upenn.edu Flying Into a Rage: Inequality between First Class and Economy Predicts Air Rage Incidents DeCelles, Katherine (University of Toronto); Norton, Michael (Harvard Business School); Ahmed, M. Bilal (n/a) Airplanes are microcosms of class-based society; drawing on research on inequality, we suggest that inequality in the air drives incidents of "air rage." Data from 2.2 million flights and 2,083 incidents from a North American airline reveals that the presence of first class predicts more frequent air rage, and that air rage becomes more frequent when inequality is heightened (the ratio of first class to economy seats is smaller). The effect of first class presence translates to the approximate effect of an 8.8 hour flight delay, and occurs over and above the effects of airplane dimensions, delays and other factors. Contact: katy.decelles@rotman.utoronto.ca Mistaking the Journey for the Destination: Overestimating the Fruits of (More) Labor Buechel, Eva C. (University of South Carolina); Morewedge, Carey K (Boston University); Zhang, Jiao (University of Oregon)

14 People believe that working harder toward a goal makes achieving it sweeter. We report four studies demonstrating that people overestimate the pleasure they will derive from sweat equity, because effort is easier to consider while forecasting an outcome in an affect-poor state than while experiencing the outcome in an affect-rich state. Forecasters believed that they would be happier if they made a good or finished a job that required (or appeared to require) more than less effort. Experiencers were equally happy having made that good or finished that job, whether it required more or less effort. Contact: eva.buechel@moore.sc.edu The Illusion of Learning Vohs, Kathleen (Univ of Minnesota); Baumeister, Roy (Florida State U); Alquist, Jessica (Texas Tech U) Theorizing has depicted emotion as a cue for learning, and so people may be misled by recent emotional states to infer that they have learned more than they actually have. Four studies showed that people associated emotion with learning and believed, falsely, that they learned more when emotional than unemotional. Participants reported that they learned more after an emotion had been induced than in various nonemotional conditions. These results held after controlling for actual learning. Contact: vohsx005@umn.edu Session #3 Track I: Biases and Heuristics II - Hilton - Salon A-1 - Saturday 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm Outcome Neglect: How Insight Failure Undermines Simple Utility Maximization Urminsky, Oleg (University of Chicago Booth School of Business); Yang, Adelle (University of Chicago Booth School of Business); Kofler, Lilly (University of Chicago) We present a common contest game as a simple test of utility maximization: whoever correctly guesses the randomly-selected prize amount (from a known distribution) wins that prize. This game is equivalent to choosing among lottery tickets with different payoffs and equal probability, but experimental participants fail to guess the optimal highest value, contrary to expected value maximization. Suboptimal choices are reduced, but not eliminated, with repeated plays, task simplification and statistical or economic training. The findings suggest that utility maximization is a heuristic that requires insight to apply, rather than a default approach to decision problems. Contact: oleg.urminsky@chicagobooth.edu Perceptions of the Average Are Not Averaged Perceptions: Biased Estimates of the Social Norm Dannals, Jennifer E (Stanford University); Miller, Dale T (Stanford University); Greer, Lindred L (Stanford University)

15 We examine how newcomers to a group infer social norms. When group behavior is homogenous, inferring the social norm is simple, but how do individuals make sense of heterogeneous behavior? In three experiments participants view distributions of skewed and non-skewed behavior and are asked to infer social norms. Individuals are accurate when inferring norms from normally distributed behavior, but in skewed distributions they overweight the behavior of outliers. We find a curvilinear pattern such that moderate outliers are overweighted but more extreme outliers are discounted. We further explore participant attributions of the outliers and participant predictions of future group behavior. Contact: jdannals@stanford.edu An Urgency Effect in Response to Future Rate Increases Zhang, Shirley (University of Chicago Booth School of Business); Sussman, Abigail (University of Chicago Booth School of Business); Hsee, Christopher K. (University of Chicago Booth School of Business) We investigated people's willingness to repay their debt as a function of the timing of interest rate changes. We found a counter-intuitive urgency effect in which people decide to repay their debt sooner when the interest rate will increase in the future than when the rate is already at a high level or when the rate will be increasing immediately. We propose that sensitivity to changes and perception of achievability together cause this effect. Across seven studies, we demonstrated the basic effect, investigated the underlying mechanisms, and examined possible moderators. Contact: shirleyzyw@gmail.com Sets and Statistics: Explaining the Offer Framing Effect O'Donnell, Michael (University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business); Critcher, Clayton R. (University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business); Nelson, Leif D. (University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business) Choices over bundles of goods can be made either singly, choosing one component at a time, or as bundle, choosing the entire group at once. The offer framing effect purports that these different mechanisms of choosing explain preferences for diversification in consumer choice. We believe, however, that the offer framing effect acts as a manipulation of set-fit effects, which hold that consumers prefer complete sets, those in which goods are unvaried or are completely different. When choices are presented as either single or bundled offers, participants are differentially induced to choosing complete sets, and thus choose different levels of variety. Contact: mo279@berkeley.edu Session #3 Track II: Consumer Decision Making II - Hilton - Salon A-2 - Saturday 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm Judging Good Taste: True Preference or Pretense? Bhattacharjee, Amit (Erasmus University); Barasch, Alixandra (University of Pennsylvania); Wertenbroch, Klaus (INSEAD)

16 Exhibiting good taste can increase consumers' standing within social groups. But given that quality standards are shared within groups, how can individuals tell if others' choices reflect authentic preferences or mere pretense? Four studies show that the proportion of high-quality tastes within a set of consumption choices provides information about both taste and authenticity. Relative to simply maximizing the proportion of high-quality choices, occasional low-quality choices serve as signals of authenticity. Judgments of true good taste result from a mixture of choice options that indicate the ability to discern quality independently. Contact: amit.k.bhattacharjee@gmail.com Understanding the Expense Prediction Bias Hardisty, David (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia); Howard, Chuck (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia); Knoll, Melissa (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau); Shaddy, Franklin (Booth School of Business, University of Chicago); Sussman, Abigail (Booth School of Business, University of Chicago) The present research explores the mis-prediction of uncertain future expenses. Previous research on expense mis-prediction has shown that people predict lower expenses for the future than for the past (Peetz & Buehler, 2009; Peetz & Buehler, 2013). We find evidence that consumers underestimate the number of future expenses, but not the amount of each one. Furthermore, we show that this bias: (A) is unique to expenses (there is no corresponding income bias), (B) gets stronger (rather than weaker) with careful prompting and thought by participants, and (C) is associated with risky financial outcomes such as payday loan use. Contact: chuck.howard@sauder.ubc.ca Consumer Evaluations of Credit Card Offers Chin, Alycia (CFPB); Bruine de Bruin, Wandi (University of Leeds and Carnegie Mellon University) To help consumers make credit card decisions, regulators require issuers to disclose costs on credit card offers. Unfortunately, such disclosures lack information on whether the costs of a specific credit card are high or low. Consumers underestimate these relative costs (Study 1). Adding distributional information about the costs of available credit cards increases consumers' understanding of individual credit cards' costs and affects their attractiveness ratings (Study 2). When consumers are given two credit card offers to compare, additional distributional information no longer makes a difference (Study 3). We discuss the usefulness of comparison information to inform consumers' credit card decisions. Contact: alycia.chin@cfpb.gov The Interpersonal Dynamics of Shared Financial Decisions Olson, Jenny (University of Kansas); Rick, Scott (University of Michigan )

17 Several recent studies have examined how individuals manage debt, but life's largest debts are often jointly held and managed (e.g., mortgages). We find that romantic partners manage debts more efficiently when working together than when working individually. The benefits are not due to greater deliberation (discussing and defending ideas); when strangers have to perform a debt management task together, they perform worse than individuals. Rather, couples benefit from identifying and empowering the partner with greater financial confidence. Jointly completing a financial "warm-up" exercise improves partners' ability to judge each other's financial confidence, and this understanding improves subsequent debt management decisions. Contact: jennyolson@ku.edu Session #3 Track III: Nudges and Choice Architecture - Hilton - Salon A-3 - Saturday 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm Ethically Deployed Defaults: Transparency and Consumer Protection Via Disclosure and Preference Articulation Steffel, Mary (University of Cincinnati); Williams, Elanor F. (University of California, San Diego); Pogacar, Ruth (University of Cincinnati); Figueras, Ana (University of Florida) We examine whether defaults remain effective when disclosed, and whether preference articulation can attenuate the influence of defaults not in individuals' or society's best interests. Experiments 1a-c show that disclosing defaults does not necessarily reduce effectiveness. Experiment 2 demonstrates that, although business-benefitting nudges seem less ethical than society-benefitting nudges, defaults remain effective even when the disclosure reveals that the default serves business interests rather than the individual's or society's. Experiment 3 shows that encouraging preference articulate before choice attenuates the effect of defaults serving business interests while leaving intact defaults serving society's interests, providing a potential solution for consumer protection. Contact: ruth.pogacar@gmail.com Informed Nudges: Preference-consistent Choice Architecture and Disclosure Castelo, Noah (Columbia University); Reeck, Crystal (Temple University); Jachimowicz, Jon M. (Columbia University); Johnson, Eric J. (Columbia University); Weber, Elke U. (Columbia University) We explore how decision makers' pre-existing preferences alter the effectiveness of choice architecture interventions and the effects of disclosing the intent of those interventions. We show that the effects of choice architecture interventions are significantly enhanced when the intent of the intervention is consistent with the preferences of the decision maker. Additionally, disclosing the intent of the interventions does not diminish their influence, even for those whose preferences are inconsistent with the intent. These findings suggest choice architects may improve the impact of interventions by considering the target population's preferences and enhance transparency without compromising efficacy by disclosing intent. Contact: n.mazereeuw@utoronto.ca

18 When Do People Prefer Carrots to Sticks? A Robust 'Matching Effect' in Policy Evaluation Evers, Ellen R. K. (The Wharton School); Inbar, Yoel (University of Toronto); Blanken, Irene (Tilburg University); Oosterwijk, Linda (Tilburg University) We find a "matching effect" in policy evaluations. Policies targeting behaviors seen as positive but voluntary are preferred when framed as advantaging those who act rather than disadvantaging those who do not. Conversely, for behaviors seen as positive and obligatory, people prefer policies that are framed as disadvantaging those who fail to act rather than advantaging those who do. These differences in evaluation occur even when policy outcomes are identical and are not the result of misunderstanding, or lack of deliberation about policy outcomes. Rather, the matching effect follows from lay beliefs about when punishment is and is not appropriate. Contact: everse@wharton.upenn.edu Interpersonal Choice Architecture Daniels, David P. (Stanford University Graduate School of Business); Zlatev, Julian J. (Stanford University Graduate School of Business); Neale, Margaret A. (Stanford University Graduate School of Business) We investigate whether and how people use four decision biases to build choice architecture for other people's decisions. We introduce "choice architecture games" in which a Choice Architect selects a choice environment and then a Decision Maker makes a decision; the Choice Architect is incentivized to prefer that a particular decision be made. Across three experiments, we find that Choice Architects correctly use the endowment effect, incorrectly use the reflection effect and the certainty effect, and apparently do not think that defaults / status quo bias matters. Policymakers can exploit this interpersonal choice architecture to select and design better nudges. Contact: ddaniels@stanford.edu Session #3 Track IV: Honesty and Dishonesty - Hilton - Salon A-4 - Saturday 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm Lie Detection is Improved Through Group Discussion, Not Aggregation of Independent Judgments Klein, Nadav (University of Chicago); Epley, Nicholas (University of Chicago) Groups can sometimes make more accurate judgments than individuals. We tested whether this group advantage extends to lie detection, an exceptionally challenging judgment with accuracy rates rarely exceeding chance. In four experiments, groups were consistently more accurate than individuals in distinguishing truths from lies. The group advantage came through discussion, and was not a product of aggregating individual opinions (a "wisdom of crowds" effect) or of altering response biases (e.g., reducing the "truth bias"). Interventions to improve lie detection typically focus on costly training for individuals. Our findings suggest a

19 simpler approach of enabling group discussion before rendering a judgment. Contact: nklein@chicagobooth.edu Motivated Moral Decoupling Among Liberals and Conservatives Bhattacharjee, Amit (Erasmus University); Berman, Jonathan Z. (London Business School); Reed II, Americus (University of Pennsylvania) Does political ideology affect how people reason to support public figures caught in scandals? Three studies show that political liberalism is associated with greater moral decoupling, or selectively separating individuals' immoral actions from evaluations of their professional performance. This effect persists for violations across all five moral foundations, including those that liberal respondents perceive as more severe. This disparity is rooted in conservatives' greater belief that character is global and drives behavior across contexts. We find evidence of motivational bias in moral decoupling judgments across the political spectrum, and the current evidence appears more robust among liberal respondents. Contact: amit.k.bhattacharjee@gmail.com When Choosing the Best Brings out the Worst: Maximizing Increases Cheating Due to Greater Perceptions of Scarcity Roux, Caroline (Concordia University, John Molson School of Business); Ma, Jingjing (Peking University, National School of Development); Goldsmith, Kelly (Northwestern University, Kellogg School of Management) Striving for the best, or a maximizing mindset, is often advocated as an ideal in many domains of consumers' lives. But how far are consumers willing to go when striving for the best? Across three studies, we demonstrate that activating a maximizing mindset increases cheating behavior because it elicits greater perceptions of scarcity. These findings advance our understanding of the potential broader societal consequences of a maximizing mindset. Contact: caroline.roux@concordia.ca When Robin Hood Takes a Polygraph: Detecting Egocentric and Altruistic Cheating Ayal, Shahar (Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya); Peleg, Dar (Tel Aviv University); Hochman, Guy (Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya); Ariely, Dan (Duke University) We used choice behavior and lie detection to examine dishonesty while participants engaged in either egocentric-cheating which benefitted themselves or altruistic- cheating which benefitted others. Participants were randomly assigned to different conditions in which they played a perceptual task that benefited themselves or others, and could increase their incentives by cheating. The results of two experiments showed that people cheat more as the possibility to justify their dishonest acts with altruistic considerations increases. Moreover, these altruistic cheaters were less likely to be detected by the lie detector than people who cheated for their own benefit. Contact: s.ayal@idc.ac.il

20 Session #4 Track I: Taxes, Fees and Payment Structures - Hilton - Salon A-1 - Saturday 4:30 pm - 6:00 pm A Prediction Gap in the Effect of Income Tax on Effort Srna, Shalena (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, USA); Zauberman, Gal (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, USA); Schrift, Rom (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, USA) Empirical evidence suggests that people are tax averse, causing them to avoid loss associated with taxes beyond equivalent costs in their purchase and policy decisions. The present research proposes and shows that people predict that they will be averse to income tax, but the actual relationship between income taxes and productivity is not straightforward. Across four incentive compatible studies, we show that people's predictions of how different income tax schemes and tax redistribution schedules of tax money will influence productivity, satisfaction, and perceptions of fairness do not match how people actually respond in an experimental pay-per-performance setting. Contact: shalena.srna@gmail.com Beware the Bundle: When Consumers Pay Less, Yet Demand More Shaddy, Franklin (University of Chicago Booth School of Business); Fishbach, Ayelet (University of Chicago Booth School of Business) How does bundling affect judgments of value? We propose the asymmetry hypothesis in the valuation of bundles: Consumers demand more compensation for the loss of items from bundles (vs. the same items lost in isolation), yet offer lower willingness-to-pay for items acquired as or added to bundles (vs. the same items purchased separately). This asymmetry persists because bundling causes consumers to perceive multiple items as a single, inseparable "gestalt" unit. Thus, the effect of bundling on valuation depends on whether items are considered in loss or acquisition. Five studies reveal that, for bundles, consumers both pay less, yet demand more. Contact: franklin.shaddy@chicagobooth.edu Income Tax and the Motivation to Work Rick, Scott (University of Michigan); Paolacci, Gabriele (Erasmus University Rotterdam); Burson, Katherine (University of Michigan) How does income tax influence the motivation to work? Income tax involves both wealth redistribution and government intervention, and unless people support both measures, they may find income tax to be demotivating. However, people who support both measures ("Egalitarian-Communitarians") may actually find income tax to be motivating. In two labor experiments, we found that framing wages as subject to an income tax reduced participants' productivity unless they were Egalitarian-Communitarian. Egalitarian-Communitarians were significantly more productive when their wages were taxed. Another equally redistributive intervention that was framed as a wage "match" (rather than a "tax") did not motivate Egalitarian-Communitarians. Contact: srick@umich.edu